5G

Harvard Physicist: ‘No Safe Way To Implement 5G’

5G technology is the holy grail of Technocrats who desperately want to enable a ubiquitous command-and-control network of IoT devices to control human populations en-masse. Thus, safety research on toxic effects is being aggressively suppressed. ⁃ TN Editor

According to the telecom industry, 5G, the “5th Generation” wireless network, is required to give people the wireless freedom they crave and need. Described by HP as “blazingly fast,” 5G, which is 70 times faster than its predecessor, 4G, “will replace cable internet for good,” allowing you to download a two-hour high-definition movie in three seconds flat.1

5G is also being touted as necessary to enable the development and proliferation of self-driving cars and other future technologies. However, as noted in a May 2019 Forbes article,2 robocar designers are not, in fact, relying on 5G for their development, and the cars themselves do not actually need that kind of bandwidth to perform the required functions.

Not one one red cent spent on safety testing

While “blazingly fast” 5G might sound attractive to many who have grown up in the internet era, there are significant health and environmental concerns relating to 5G radiation that are not being properly addressed, which may have profound implications both in the short and long term.

If increased internet speed and reliability are the end goal, then fiber optic connections would be a far better (and safer) way forward. Indeed, we need more wired connections and fewer wireless ones as it is. With 5G, microwave radiation exposures will so massively increase, there’s no doubt in my mind that mankind will eventually end up regretting its shortsightedness.

Remember that no one has problems with the faster speeds of 5G, no one. What any serious student of health has concerns with is that the data are being distributed wirelessly, when in most cases the data could be distributed easier and less expensively over fiber optic cables.

No Safety Studies Have Been Done

Unlike the 4G technology currently in use, which relies on 90-foot cell towers with about a dozen antenna ports on each, the 5G system uses “small cell” facilities or bases, each with about 100 antenna ports.3

These cell bases will be mounted to already existing infrastructure such as utility poles. Ultimately, many if not most homeowners can expect to end up with a 5G cell base mounted right outside or very near their home.

As noted by a Federal Communications Commission representative during a February 6, 2019, senate commerce hearing (above), no 5G safety studies have been conducted or funded by the agency or the telecom industry, and none is planned.4,5

In short, there’s no telling exactly what might happen to our ecology and the people being exposed to this novel wireless technology 24/7, once it’s deployed. As noted by Dr. Cindy Russell,6 executive director of Physicians for Safe Technology, in her August 2018 paper in the journal Environmental Research:7

“Like other common toxic exposures, the effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF EMR) will be problematic if not impossible to sort out epidemiologically as there no longer remains an unexposed control group.

This is especially important considering these effects are likely magnified by synergistic toxic exposures and other common health risk behaviors. Effects can also be non-linear.

Because this is the first generation to have cradle-to-grave life span exposure to this level of man-made microwave (RF EMR) radiofrequencies, it will be years or decades before the true health consequences are known. Precaution in the roll out of this new technology is strongly indicated.”

There’s No Safe Way to Implement 5G

Similarly, in an article8 on the Environmental Health Trust’s website, Ronald Powell, Ph.D., a retired Harvard scientist of applied physics, notes “there is NO SAFE WAY to implement 5G in our communities; rather, there are only ‘bad ways’ and ‘worse ways,’” and rather than argue about who should have control over its deployment, we should focus on preventing its employment altogether.

Indeed, mounting research9,10 suggest the proliferation of 5G for the sake of faster wireless internet could be a public health disaster, so if 5G does end up “replacing cable internet for good,” humanity may be in for a devastating shock in coming decades, if not sooner.

While it may take years to fully ascertain the full effects of 5G, there are early warning signs. People have reported mass die-offs of bees around 5G towers in California,11 for example, and residents in Gateshead in the U.K. started reported insomnia, chronic nosebleeds and stillbirths after the installation of streetlamps that emit 5G radiation in 2016.12

‘No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe,’ Scientific American Says

In an October 17, 2019, article,13 Scientific American warns “We have no reason to believe 5G is safe,” and that “contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks.” The article, written by Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., director for the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley, notes:14

The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of ‘fear mongering’ over the advent of wireless technology’s 5G.

Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.”

Moskowitz points out that the FCC has recently announced15 its intention to reaffirm and maintain current radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits, which were originally adopted in the late 1990s. However, there are significant problems with this.

Current RFR limits are based on studies from the 1980s looking at the behavioral effects of microwave radiation on rats, “and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure,” Moskowitz writes.16

These limits are already outdated for our current levels of exposure, so they’re surely bound to be completely inadequate for 5G. Since the 1980s, more than 500 studies17 have identified harmful health or biological effects at RFR intensities far below those needed to produce heating, yet the FCC is ignoring these clearly established facts. As noted by Moskowitz:18

“The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure.

New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.”

Read full story here…




Ministry Of Pharma: Technocrats Rule Healthcare

Big Pharma is a perfect example of Technocrats gone wild as they have taken control of the government agencies that are supposed to protect the population from harmful medical products.

Furthermore, one finds that Big Pharma works closely with the United Nations to find justification on controlling other countries around the world as well.

Be sure to listen to Patrick Wood’s related podcast on this story.

⁃ TN Editor

How many of you remember reading about the Ministries of Love, Peace, Plenty, and Truth in George Orwell’s dystopian novel, 1984? If we were to create another ministry today, it would be the Ministry of Pharma. And that ministry has plans for you through promising health while delivering disease. While the majority of Americans waltz through the motions of their daily lives, Big Pharma hijacked our political system to skirt laws and has helped to roll out its omniscient vaccine agenda.

The ominous program will be more than one size fits all. It will consist of a top-down, full-blown compliance program, force-feeding vaccines to all regardless of age, gender, or infirmity. As always, safety will be cast aside while pharma tramples individual rights and everyone’s health. The fascist plan is being created today within by our national leaders without public discussion.

The vaccine manufacturers realize that cajoling politicians to write and pass mandatory vaccination legislation takes time. In the current climate, messy court fights ensue that may reach the US Supreme Court. The vaccine producers needed another way to secure full, unobstructed compliance for all: it will be the 2020 National Vaccine Plan (NVP), a federal program being fast-tracked into action after nearly a decade of development.

Ministry of Pharma, Part 1: Pass Laws

Big Pharma has long been laying out its TriPOD strategy, “Trial Point of Dispensing,” which was introduced through a FEMA drill staged on Pier 92 in lower Manhattan the day before 9/11. The plan is about streamlining the distribution of medicine during a terrorist attack. In the event of a real emergency – or false flag event – TriPOD will focus on the dispensing, tracking, and monitoring compliance which could include indefinite quarantine.

Last month, HHS posted a public notice on its website regarding the 2020 National Vaccine Plan Request for Information. It gave the general public a short nine (9) days to post comments.

The notice read (in part):

“For nearly a decade, the National Vaccine Plan (NVP) has served as the nation’s leading roadmap for enhancing all aspects of the U.S. vaccine and immunization system. To ensure the NVP remains nimble to the evolving vaccine and immunization landscape, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is leading the development of the 2020 National Vaccine Plan. The updated plan will reflect immunization across the lifespan and guide priority actions for the period 2020-2025.”

What HHS has never disclosed is how deeply the pharmaceutical industry has been involved in every step to develop this plan to force conformity and ensure vaccine uptake.

The 2020 National Vaccine Plan will ultimately lead to the elimination of rights, control of information, and compliance through technology. One piece of national legislation,  introduced by Frederica Wilson (D-FL) in 2019, proposed mandatory vaccination for children (the adult’s bill will come next year).

Connected to mandatory vaccination are bills to eliminate individual and national sovereignty. Two separate bills were introduced in 2019 that, if passed, would be an infringement on American sovereignty. The first is HR 654 “Supporting the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.” Introduced in October 2019 by Congresswoman Barbara Lee’s (D-CA), this is an update of a bill she introduced in 2017, HR 1111, “Department of Peacebuilding Act.” While the names of both bills sound noble, the word ‘sustainable’ is sprinkled throughout the proposed law.

Sustainable development is code for globalism. The Sustainability Movement is a unipolar, fascist dictate that 193 nations signed and adopted at the 2015 United Nations General Assembly. At that congress, they announced the arrival of the Agenda 2030, the plan to change the world. All 193 countries sacrificed their sovereignty and gave away their power to foreign, unelected officials and lifer bureaucrats at the U.N.

Sounds crazy, right? It gets worse. Massive, uncontrolled migration of ethnic groups across borders will turn the developed world upside-down. Europe has been experiencing the fall out of unstructured immigration with Sweden and Germany most visibly seeing the errors of these open-border policies.

The lofty language in Agenda 2030 is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. If the US Constitution, the executive branches of government and the Bill of Rights can be circumvented and then totally eliminated, America will be forced to join the global climate change groupthink. The climate cabal share the same destructive vision for humanity as vaccine pushers: depopulate the world.

In 2006, University of Texas ecologist Eric Pianka told a meeting of the Texas Academy of Science that 90 percent of human beings must die in order to save the planet. As reported on Reason.com: 

In his estimation, 6.5 billion humans is too many. Pianka feels “we’ve grown fat, apathetic and miserable,” all the while leaving the planet parched. His solution? A 90 percent reduction in the total population. His favorite candidate for eliminating most of humans from the earth is releasing an airborne Ebola (Ebola reston), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years.

Fast forward to November 2019.

A letter, signed by more than 11,000 scientists from around the world, claimed Earth is facing a “climate emergency” predominantly caused by human activities. The scientists concluded that far fewer humans could save the planet.

This goes along with the assertions made by Swedish scientist, Magnus Söderlund from the Stockholm School of Economics, whose comments were reported in September’s The National Review. He suggested that climate change may “pave the way for cannibalism.” This bizarre concept was bleated out during an AOC town meeting by a woman who screamed, “We have got to start eating babies.”

Vaccines are the lead soldiers in the global plan to “thin the herd.” And as mandatory legislation rolls through the state legislatures, few understand that at some point, pharma will get tired of fighting skirmishes in the 46 remaining states with exemptions. The iron hand will be raised to order mandates from above, and slam them through with federal legislation.

Ministry of Pharma, Part 2: Control of Information

Beyond eliminating rights and mandating vaccines for all, Big Pharma’s game plan, with help from the UN, WHO, HHS, and CDC, includes the absolute control over information. By next year, information control could be nearly complete, riding on the backbone of technology. Such control will be more than CDC talking points and pharma propaganda. It will lead to the elimination of open debate and the censorship of opinions and free speech.

By completely controlling the narrative, pharma can promote the “vaccines are safe and effective” propaganda unchallenged. Dissenters will be silenced. Book sales killed. Facebook posts blocked. Twitter posts shadowbanned and followers deleted. Google searches and critical rankings will be manipulated and buried. Negative remarks in the comment sections of online publications deleted. All to disseminate lies. Big Pharma’s information control will weaponize social media so that even mild discussions about vaccines, such as Bill Maher’s interview last week with Dr. Jay Gordon, will not be allowed.

The reach of Pharma extends beyond the list above. The vaccine deep state has also forced email hosts and other tech companies to stop doing business with those who don’t follow Big Pharma’s script. At their own discretion, the medical and pharma deep state have decided THEY are the TRUTH and have labeled everything else that challenges this premise as “fake news.”

Just over the horizon looms an even larger and more ominous danger. The social credit scoring system will (soon) be coming to America, straight out of Communist China. This futuristic program, designed by Big Tech (Google), Big Data (see Sidewalk Labs) and other cooperative parties, intends to end independent thought and quash non-conformist behavior.

Here’s a brief explanation of the Social Credit Score System, from Forbes:

Social credit ratings can go up and down based on an individual’s actions. Purchasing diapers for a child might bump your score (the system assumes you’re a responsible caregiver) while it might take a hit when you purchase alcohol. Are you a gamer? It’s better for your social credit score if you never cheat, but if you play video games more than 10 hours a day, your social credit rating will likely be lower than the diaper-buying caregiver. If you are found guilty of disrupting or blocking check-in counters or passageways in an airport, your social credit score can be tanked.

Once enacted, a low social credit score could block access to travel, bank loans, and insurance, or could even block your ability to buy a car.

Ministry of Pharma, Part 3: Compliance Through Technology

Most people know intel agencies can track the movements of individuals via their cell phone, even when the device is turned off. The 2020 NVP plans to work in concert with the WHO’s ID-2020 program. The implementation of ID-2020 will be insidious, similar to the Orwellian takeover of the formerly free lives of American citizens. This includes an alliance between Big Pharma, Microsoft, GAVI, and Bill Gates eugenics philanthropy which includes the use of vaccination to microchip each recipient.

The rollout of 5G networks will come with an array of 5G high altitude drone platforms (already in testing) and a global 5G satellite grid that, once fully deployed, will be able to track every human on earth.

  • They will know your DNA.
  • They will monitor your vaccine compliance—with or without your mobile phone.
  • They will own your body and dictate your future.

Read full story here…




Google

Google Secretly Gathers Health Data On Millions Of Americans

Whatever happened to patient privacy and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) passed by Congress in 1996? Technocrats at Google do what they want in total disregard for the law.

Although Google and other Technocrat Big Tech companies have been busted dozens of times by government bodies at all levels, they patently and routinely ignore all legal, ethical and moral restraints.

Do  you trust Google with 100% of your health records under its control? Do you think that Google would not use such data in other divisions of the company unrelated to health care? 

It is now much more clear why Google bought FitBit for $2.1 billion earlier this month: that is, to gain access to real-time health data of FitBit’s 28 million active users around the world. It is plainly evident that Google intends to become the Amazon of your health care. ⁃ TN Editor

Google is engaged with one of the U.S.’s largest health-care systems on a project to collect and crunch the detailed personal-health information of millions of people across 21 states.

The initiative, code-named “Project Nightingale,” appears to be the biggest effort yet by a Silicon Valley giant to gain a toehold in the health-care industry through the handling of patients’ medical data. Amazon.com Inc., Apple and Microsoft Corp. are also aggressively pushing into health care, though they haven’t yet struck deals of this scope.

Google began Project Nightingale in secret last year with St. Louis-based Ascension, a Catholic chain of 2,600 hospitals, doctors’ offices and other facilities, with the data sharing accelerating since summer, according to internal documents.

The data involved in the initiative encompasses lab results, doctor diagnoses and hospitalization records, among other categories, and amounts to a complete health history, including patient names and dates of birth.

Paging Nurse Google

The tech giant is teaming with Ascension on an ambitious project to crunch patient data for treatment and administrative purposes.

Neither patients nor doctors have been notified. At least 150 Google employees already have access to much of the data on tens of millions of patients, according to a person familiar with the matter and the documents.

In a news release issued after The Wall Street Journal reported on Project Nightingale on Monday, the companies said the initiative is compliant with federal health law and includes robust protections for patient data.

Some Ascension employees have raised questions about the way the data is being collected and shared, both from a technological and ethical perspective, according to the people familiar with the project. But privacy experts said it appeared to be permissible under federal law. That law, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, generally allows hospitals to share data with business partners without telling patients, as long as the information is used “only to help the covered entity carry out its health care functions.”

Google in this case is using the data in part to design new software, underpinned by advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning, that zeroes in on individual patients to suggest changes to their care. Staffers across Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent, have access to the patient information, internal documents show, including some employees of Google Brain, a research science division credited with some of the company’s biggest breakthroughs.

Google Cloud President Tariq Shaukat said the company’s goal for health care is centered on “ultimately improving outcomes, reducing costs, and saving lives.”

Read full story here…

See Also…

Furious backlash after it emerges that Google has secretly amassed healthcare data on millions of people




orwell 1984

Coming Soon: Meds And Techniques To Erase Memories

Orwell’s torture ‘Room 101’ to adjust memories may be a thing of the past as Technocrat scientists are nearing a drug-related solution to ‘help you’ erase memories, whether good or bad. Is two plus two really four, or is it five? ⁃ TN Editor
 

The 60 souls that signed on for Dr. Alain Brunet’s memory manipulation study were united by something they would rather not remember. The trauma of betrayal.

For some, it was infidelity and for others, a brutal, unanticipated abandonment. “It was like, ‘I’m leaving you. Goodbye,” the McGill University associate professor of psychiatry says.

In cold, clinical terms, his patients were suffering from an “adjustment disorder” due to the termination (not of their choosing) of a romantic relationship. The goal of Brunet and other researchers is to help people like this — the scorned, the betrayed, the traumatized — lose their total recall. To deliberately forget.

Over four to six sessions, volunteers read aloud from a typed script they had composed themselves — a first-person account of their breakup, with as many emotional details as possible — while under the influence of propranolol, a common and inexpensive blood pressure pill. The idea was to purposely reactivate the memory and bring the experience and the stinging emotions it aroused to life again. “How did you feel about that?” they were asked. How do you feel right now? And, most importantly: Has your memory changed since last week?

The investigators had hypothesized that four to six sessions of memory reactivation under propranolol would be sufficient to dramatically blunt the memories associated with their “attachment injury.” Decrease the strength of the memory, Brunet says, and you decrease the strength of the pain.

The study is now complete, and Brunet is hesitant to discuss the results, which have been submitted to a journal for peer review and publication. However, the participants “just couldn’t believe that we could do so much in such a small amount of time,” he confides.

“They were able to turn the page. That’s what they would tell us — ‘I feel like I’ve turned the page. I’m no longer obsessed by this person, or this relationship.’”

Brunet insists he isn’t interested in deleting or scrubbing painful memories out entirely. The idea of memory erasure, of finding the cellular imprint of a specific, discreet memory in the brain, of isolating and inactivating the brain cells behind that memory, unnerves him. ‘It’s not going to come from my lab,” he says, although others are certainly working on it. Memories are part of who we are, what forms our identity, what makes us authentic, “and as long as only one choice exists right now, and it’s toning down a memory, we feel on very solid and comfortable ground,” ethically speaking, Brunet says.

“However, if one day you had two options — I can tone down your memory, or I can remove it altogether, from your head, from your mind — what would you choose?”

The choice might soon be yours.

“If you could erase the memory of the worst day of your life, would you,” Elizabeth Phelps and Stefan Hofmann write in the journal, Nature. “How about your memory of a person who has caused you pain?”

What was once purely science fiction is moving ever closer to clinical reality. Researchers are working on techniques and drugs that might enable us to edit our memories or at least seriously dull their impact — to make the intolerable bearable — by, say, swallowing a pill to block the synaptic changes needed for a memory to solidify. A pill that could be taken hours, even months or years after the event.

Much of the work is based on the theory of memory reconsolidation – the belief that the mere conscious act of recalling or conjuring a memory makes it vulnerable to tinkering or meddling. When a memory is evoked, a reconsolidation window opens for a brief period of time (two to five hours, according to Brunet), during which time the memory returns to a state of “lability.” It becomes pliable, like Play-Doh. It also becomes susceptible to modification, before “reconsolidating” or re-storage. The thought is that propranolol interferes with proteins in the brain needed to lock down the memory again.

A similar line of thinking holds that a memory isn’t an exact impression of the original event, an Iphone video of the past, says Boston University neuroscientist Steve Ramirez. Rather it’s more like Plato’s wax tablet. Press a signet ring into the wax and it leaves an imprint, but the wax can melt when we recall the memory, form again and then melt all over again. “Memory is dynamic,” Ramirez says. It isn’t static. Memories can also be updated with new information when they’re recalled, like hitting “save as” every time you go into a Word file.

Read full story here…




Neurosurgeon: EMF Radiation Can Cause Leak In Blood Brain Barrier

The industry science behind EMF radiation is more corrupt than that of climate science, and has been so since the beginning. With the imminent rollout of 5G, no scientific studies have been done on exposure to humans at any distance. ⁃ TN Editor

Neurosurgeon and researcher Dr. Leif Salford has conducted many studies on radio frequency radiation and its effects on the brain. Dr. Salford called the potential implications of some of his research “terrifying.” Some of the most concerning conclusions result from the fact that the weakest exposure levels to wireless radiation caused the greatest effect in causing the blood brain barrier to leak.

Since he began his line of research in 1988, Dr. Leif Salford and his colleagues at Lund University Hospital in Sweden has exposed over 1,600 experimental animals to low-level radiation. Their results were consistent and worrisome: radiation, including that from cell phones, caused the blood-brain barrier–the brain’s first line of defense against infections and toxic chemicals–to leak.

Researchers in 13 other laboratories in 6 different countries had reported the same effect, but no one had proven whether it would lead to any damage in the long term. In a study published June 2003 in Environmental Health Perspectives, Salford’s team repeated the experiment on 32 additional animals, but this time waited eight weeks before sacrificing them and examining their brains. In those animals that had been exposed to a cell phone, up to two percent of the neurons in all areas of the brain were shrunken and degenerated.

We were warned in 2010: Since then, 4G and 5G…

Salford, chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery at his institution, called the potential implications “terrifying.” “We have good reason to believe,” he said, “that what happens in rats’ brains also happens in humans.” Referring to today’s teenagers, the study’s authors wrote that “a whole generation of users may suffer negative effects, perhaps as early as in middle age.”

An argument is sometimes made (not necessarily accurately) to those who express concern about radiation from “smart” meters, Wi Fi, etc, that the radiation emitted from these devices is at such a low level that the public needn’t worry about it. However Dr. Salford’s studies showed opening up of the blood brain barrier from very low levels of radiation. In fact, Cindy Sage and Dr. David Carpenter write in a 2008 paper (Public Health Implications of Wireless Technologies) it was “the weakest exposure level [which] showed the greatest effect in opening up the BBB [blood brain barrier].”

Dr. Devra Davis, author of “Disconnect” explains the science of cell phone radiation in a very comprehensive way. For example she shows photos of two cells, one whose DNA has been damaged by “gamma” radiation (which is what was emitted in Hiroshima) and another cell damaged by low level pulsing non ionizing radiation (from a cell phone). Both cells look very damaged compared to a normal cell; but she even goes on to say the DNA from the cell exposed to the cell phone radiation looks worse. She also discusses the campaign to discredit reputable scientists and their studies–some of these reputable studies having been around since 1972 (Frey).

In May of 2011, the World Health Organization official recognized that wireless radiation such as emitted by “smart meters” is a possible carcinogen. After decades of corporately-funded, biased research being held up as “industry-standard”, there are hundreds of independent peer-reviewed scientific studies now showing there is a clear health hazard with technology emitting wireless radiation in the range that “smart meters” do. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of people with a “smart meter” installed, have contracted illness, insomnia, rashes, headaches, and worse. And many have been forced to leave their homes entirely, due to health effects. What’s more, in apartment buildings where 30+ “smart meters” are installed in a single electrical room, the dangers are even higher. There have been no long-term health studies done on this high level of Electromagnetic Radiation.

Read full story here…




Multiple Studies Show MMR And Pertussis Vaccine Failure

Big Pharma, which is full of Technocrat groupthink, demands universally mandated vaccinations that either don’t work or are harmful to the human population. Anti-Vaxxers are demonized, harassed and censored for daring to use common sense in defense against the propaganda. ⁃ TN Editor

We are living in a day and age where there is a tremendous divide occurring among the populace on multiple subjects, one of them being vaccination. We are heavily marketed with the idea that vaccines are completely safe for everybody, that they save lives, and that the science is settled. This type of narrative comes straight from pharmaceutical companies and federal health regulatory agencies like the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

However, there is a lot of science that continues to emerge which summarily discount the claims being made by pharmaceutical companies and federal health regulatory agencies. Not only are there contradictions in their science, but also extreme corruption within these companies and agencies has been exposed on multiple occasions. One great example would be senior CDC scientist Dr. William Thompson, who blew the whistle in 2014 on data corruption by executives within the CDC with regards to falsified data pertaining to the MMR vaccine. One study which purports to show no link between the vaccine and autism had some of its data sets removed, which otherwise showed a strong correlation between the vaccine to autism.

Two years after that more than a dozen senior CDC scientists anononymously put out a paper (the SPIDER papers) in which they expressed their concerns about the corruption within the agency, its complacency, and undue corporate influence on the published science. The revolving door that exists between these agencies contributes to the continued corruption. As an example, CDC Director from 2002-2009 Julie Gerberding became the head Merck’s vaccines division, which came with a $2.5 million annual salary and $5 million in stock options.

The Failing MMR Vaccine

A study published as far back as 1994 in the JAMA Internal Medicine details quite clearly that the Measles vaccine does not and has not worked:

We found 18 reports of measles outbreaks in very highly immunized school populations where 71% to 99.8% of students were immunized against measles. Despite these high rates of immunization, 30% to 100% of all measles cases in these outbreaks occurred in previously immunized students. In our hypothetical school model, after more than 95% of schoolchildren are immunized against measles, the majority of measles cases occur in appropriately immunized children.

The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons. Because of the failure rate of the vaccine and the unique transmissibility of the measles virus, the currently available measles vaccine, used in a single-dose strategy, is unlikely to completely eliminate measles. The long term success of a two-dose strategy to eliminate measles remains to be determined. (source)

There are many examples up to the present day that clearly indicate the failure of the vaccine. For example, A study published in the highly authoritative Bulletin of the World Health Organization looked at recent measles occurrences throughout China and found that there were 707 measles outbreaks in the country recorded between 2009 and 2012, with a steep upward trend in 2013. “The number of measles cases reported in the first 10 months of 2013 – 26,443 – was three times the number reported in the whole of 2012.” This is odd considering that since 2009 “…the first dose of measles-virus-containing vaccine has reached more than 90% of the target population.” (source)

A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases – whose authorship includes scientists working for the Bureau of Immunization, New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA – looked at evidence from the 2011 New York measles outbreak, which showed that individuals with prior evidence of measles vaccination and vaccine immunity were both capable of being infected with measles and infecting others with it (secondary transmission). (source)

During the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccines. Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015, 73 were identified as vaccine sequences. The Pharma-owned media generated high public anxiety, a form of fear mongering that led the public to demonize unvaccinated children, who were falsely perceived as the spreaders of this disease. Rebecca J. McNall, a co-author of the published report, is a CDC official in the Division of Viral Diseases who had the data proving that the measles outbreak was in part caused by the vaccine. It is evidence of the vaccine’s failure to provide immunity. (source)

How Many People Is The Measles Vaccine Injuring?

According to a MedAlerts search of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, which is the subject of the pilot study mentioned above, as of 2/5/19, the cumulative raw count from measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines alone was: 93,929 adverse events, 1,810 disabilities, 6,902 hospitalizations, and 463 deaths.

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid out approximately $4 billion to compensate families of vaccine-injured children. As astronomical as the monetary awards are, they’re even more alarming considering HHS claims that only an estimated 1% of vaccine injuries are even reported to the VAERS. Again, these facts are also illustrated by the study that’s the main focus of this article. If the numbers from VAERS and HHS are correct, only 1/3 of the petitions are compensated – then the compensation could be up to 300 times greater, if all vaccine injuries were actually compensated for.

There are many examples up to the present day that clearly indicate the failure of the vaccine. For example, A study published in the highly authoritative Bulletin of the World Health Organization looked at recent measles occurrences throughout China and found that there were 707 measles outbreaks in the country recorded between 2009 and 2012, with a steep upward trend in 2013. “The number of measles cases reported in the first 10 months of 2013 – 26,443 – was three times the number reported in the whole of 2012.” This is odd considering that since 2009 “…the first dose of measles-virus-containing vaccine has reached more than 90% of the target population.” (source)


The Takeaway

The tactic of Pharma-owned mainstream media is to use fear, ridicule and terms like “Anti-Vaxxers” to marginalize anyone who doesn’t believe the entire planet should be vaccinated. Vaccine advocates and mainstream media never really seem to address the points made, like the ones above, or the science provided by vaccine safety advocates. This alone should tell us something about the safety of vaccines, and why the push for mandatory vaccination is highly objectionable.

Because mainstream media, mainstream education, and our pharma-driven health care system have a stranglehold on the proliferation of information, not many people are aware of the information that’s presented in this article. If we continue to give our brains away to these authority figures, we continue to be impacted by extreme amounts of propaganda. However, as we start thinking for ourselves and realize that there is a lot of information out there that is being kept from us, the picture becomes a little more clear.

Read full story here…




Vaccines

Warning: ‘DNA-Based’ Vaccines Are Straight Ahead

Big Pharma intends to create DNA-based vaccines that will literally change your body’s DNA. With mandatory vaccinations increasingly being legislated, this bodes a very dangerous health future.

Technocrats and Transhumans occupy the same philosophy that science will and can solve everything. Creating Humanity 2.0, or H+, has long had a bold goal to  to conquer death through immortality. Modifying human DNA is a prime element in that quest. ⁃ TN Editor

The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) has launched efforts to create a vaccine that would protect people from most flu strains, all at once, with a single shot.

Over the years, I’ve written many articles refuting claims that vaccines are safe and effective, but we’ll put all that aside for the moment and follow the bouncing ball.

Massachusetts Senator and big spender, Ed Markey, has introduced a bill that would shovel no less than a billion dollars toward the universal flu-vaccine project.

Here is a sentence from an NIAID press release that mentions one of several research approaches:

“NIAID Vaccine Research Center scientists have initiated Phase 1/2 studies of a universal flu vaccine strategy that includes an investigational DNA-based vaccine (called a DNA ‘prime’)…”

This is quite troubling, if you know what the phrase “DNA vaccine” means. It refers to what the experts are touting as the next generation of immunizations.

Instead of injecting a piece of a virus into a person, in order to stimulate the immune system, synthesized genes would be shot into the body. This isn’t traditional vaccination anymore. It’s gene therapy.

In any such method, where genes are edited, deleted, added, no matter what the pros say, there are always “unintended consequences,” to use their polite phrase. The ripple effects scramble the genetic structure in numerous unknown ways.

Here is the inconvenient truth about DNA vaccines—

They will permanently alter your DNA.

The reference is the New York Times, 3/15/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research—the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was three years ago.]

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline:

“The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”

Alteration of the human genetic makeup.

Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence. And once a person’s DNA is changed, he will live with that change—and all the ripple effects in his genetic makeup—for the rest of his life.

The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

This is genetic roulette with a loaded gun. Anyone and everyone on Earth injected with a DNA vaccine will undergo permanent and unknown genetic changes…

And the further implications are clear. Vaccines can be used as a cover for the injections of any and all genes, whose actual purpose is re-engineering humans in far-reaching ways.

The emergence of this Frankenstein technology is paralleled by a shrill push to mandate vaccines, across the board, for both children and adults. The pressure and propaganda are planet-wide.

The freedom and the right to refuse vaccines has always been vital. It is more vital than ever now.

It means the right to preserve your inherent DNA.

Read full story here…




Gender Dysphoria

Gender Dysphoria Proving Deadly To Thousands

Teaching pre-adolescents that gender dysphoria is normal and acceptable is proving deadly for thousands of unsuspecting children who are administered gender-transitioning hormones.

Definition: Gender dysphoria involves a conflict between a person’s physical or assigned gender and the gender with which he/she/they identify. People with gender dysphoria may be very uncomfortable with the gender they were assigned, sometimes described as being uncomfortable with their body (particularly developments during puberty) or being uncomfortable with the expected roles of their assigned gender.”

⁃ TN Editor

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has documented thousands of deaths linked to the puberty-blocking drugs now increasingly given to children who suffer from gender dysphoria or claim to be “transgender.”

Between 2013 and June 2019, FDA recorded 41,213 adverse events, including 6,379 deaths and 25,645 “serious” reactions in patients who took the hormone blocker known as Lupron — the same drug given to children who say their gender identity is not consistent with their biological sex.

Leuprolide Acetate, known as Lupron, is clinically approved for treatment of prostate cancer in men, endometriosis in women, and, for a short period of time, “precocious puberty” — a condition in which children begin puberty at a significantly younger age than is considered normal.

Lupron is also being used — without formal FDA approval — as a puberty blocker on the increasing number of children and adolescents who are being diagnosed in the U.S. and the U.K. with gender dysphoria. This is being done — with the support of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Endocrine Society — despite the fact there is no evidence that such hormonal treatments actually benefit children and adolescents with gender dysphoria.

The American College of Pediatricians has compiled significant research on the effects of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on children.

Complications related to the drug’s use include malignant tumors, cardiovascular events, such as heart attacks and blood clots, suicidal behavior and other psychological disorders, brittle bones and painful joints, and sterility.

Dr. Jane Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, confirmed to Breitbart News in email comments that while some of the deaths reported by FDA could have been patients who died of prostate cancer, the problem is that very little is known about the use of Lupron “to treat healthy children, deliberately to block normal maturation.”

Lupron “is off-label for lack of long-term studies,” she said, adding:

It undoubtedly causes irreversible loss of fertility and many other adverse effects that are potentially lethal. It does not turn a male child into a female child, only into a eunuch who will lose his full potential for growth and strength. Children have no capacity to comprehend these long-term consequences, so the use of this drug in gender-confused children constitutes unethical experimentation; informed consent is not possible.

Gender-transitioning hormone treatments have been successful for pharmaceutical companies. In 2017, AbbVie, which produces Lupron, observed sales of the drug were $669 million just in the United States alone.

California-based endocrinologist and specialist on childhood gender dysphoria Dr. Michael Laidlaw has noted the medical industry is looking at a “windfall” as a result of patients seeking out treatment for gender dysphoria.

“Big pharma, big hospital systems, surgical centers and doctors seek to gain huge profits,” Laidlaw said. “Lupron … monthly is $775 alone. That’s a $27,000 ‘pause button’ at 5 years [of age]. Multiply this together with the huge rise in cases documented or observed in Western nations and a major windfall is to be had.”

However, while Lupron may be therapeutic for men coping with prostate cancer, Laidlaw emphasized in an interview with the Christian Post that “gender dysphoria is not an endocrine condition, but is a psychological one and should, therefore, be treated with proper psychological care.”

He warned, nevertheless, that once puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are injected into children, an “endocrine condition” in these children will develop.

St. Louis-based pediatric endocrinologist Dr. Paul Hruz also told the Christian Post there is much that is unknown about giving hormone blockers like Lupron to children.

“It’s often claimed that medical blockade of puberty allows a child more time to sort out issues of their gender identity, that it alleviates dysphoria in affected children, and that it makes it easier if and when they choose to go on and get other treatments, namely [sex change] surgery,” he said. “It’s also claimed that it’s completely safe and reversible.”

Hruz noted Lupron does influence bone density, and since adolescence is a time when young people accumulate the bone mass essential for the rest of their lives, there is cause for concern about whether a young person can gain back bone density once they go off the drug.

“The reality is that there is no long-term data about treating children, and the only data that we have in adults indicates that medical interventions to align the appearance of the body to a transgendered identity does not fix the problem,” he said.

The psychological problems associated with gender dysphoria are becoming increasingly obvious, though transgender activists insist the problems exist because children and adolescents are not immediately “affirmed” in their new gender identity by parents and other significant people in their lives.

Read full story here…




vaccine

Vaccine Mandates for Everyone, Everywhere – A Globally Coordinated Agenda

Technocracy’s endgame to use its ‘science of social engineering’ for the sake of total social control includes the entire field of healthcare, including globally mandated vaccines. ⁃ TN Editor

In the United States, those who are vaccine risk-aware have much to be concerned about right now. More and more states—and many legislators from both political parties—are displaying a willingness to impose heavy-handed vaccine mandates that trample on religiousparental and human rights—including the precious right to “security of person” guaranteed by Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

What some Americans may not realize is that the current push for mandates is playing out not just in the U.S. but in other countries as well, reflecting a broader—and indeed, global—agenda. Countries such as Australia, Italy and France have taken the lead in transitioning away from government interventions that “merely nudge or persuade individuals to vaccinate” and toward a more punitive exercise of “coercive power”—even though research suggests that “tougher stances on the part of doctors and public health experts tend to polarize attitudes in the public.” Australia’s 2016 “no jab, no pay” law, for example, withholds thousands of dollars in childcare subsidies from parents branded as “vaccine refusers,” and some Australian states restrict unvaccinated children’s access to child care altogether.

One of the primary cover stories that governments are using to justify the fierce uptick in vaccine coercion is the argument that infectious diseases pose a threat to national security. Measles represents the overblown threat du jour, while around the world, officials and media keep the public in the dark about the measles vaccine’s risks. In 2014, the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) formed to “elevate global health security as a national and global priority.” One of the eleven “Action Packages” to which GHSA stakeholders agreed was an “Immunization Action Package” that just so happens to use measles vaccine coverage as its proxy indicator for success. Considering that the Action Package’s aim is to marshall regional and global collaboration to “accelerate” vaccine coverage, how should we construe the measles hysteria that international organizations, governments and the media have been fomenting ever since the GHSA’s creation?

… taking the concept of an “interconnected global network” to an entirely new level all sorts of public and private ‘advisory partners’ are also in on the push for unitary action, including various United Nations (UN) agencies, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, the African Union (AU), the European Union (EU) and even, somewhat ominously, Interpol.

An interconnected global network

Although generally not in the media spotlight, the GHSA attracted high-level attention and commitments from the powerful from the get-go. Within four months of its February 2014 launch, the GHSA received a key endorsement from the G7, and in September, President Obama hosted the new entity’s first major meeting at the White House. Distracting the public from the earth-shattering revelations of CDC vaccine fraud issued a few weeks earlier by whistleblower William Thompson (on August 27, 2014), GHSA meeting participants instead solemnly declared: “A biological threat anywhere is a biological threat everywhere, and it is the world’s responsibility to respond as one.”

In late 2016, the outgoing President Obama signed an Executive Order that “cemented” the GHSA “as a national, presidential-level priority” and positioned the U.S. “as a committed, long-term catalyst” for executing the partnership’s goals. At present, the GHSA has 67 member countries, but—taking the concept of an “interconnected global network” to an entirely new level—all sorts of public and private “advisory partners” are also in on the push for unitary action, including various United Nations (UN) agencies, the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank, the African Union (AU), the European Union (EU) and even, somewhat ominously, Interpol.

The GHSA promotes external country-level evaluations to assess, among other measures, steps taken to prevent infectious disease threats—with “prevention” defined as “high immunisation coverage”—and improve surveillance (via detection, assessment and reporting of “public health events”). The U.S. was one of the first countries to step up for an assessment, conducted in close collaboration by external evaluators and the CDC. (The CDC head at the time was Thomas Frieden, praised by Obama as “an expert in preparedness and response to health emergencies” but arrested in 2018 on charges of sexual abuse.) The evaluators gave the U.S. top scores for measles vaccine coverage and “national vaccine access and delivery” while awarding lower scores for “dynamic listening and rumour management” and “communication engagement with affected communities.”

Other international initiatives buttress the GHSA, including the WHO-coordinated International Health Regulations (IHR) established in 2005 (a 196-nation accord to “work together for global security”) and Target 3.8 of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which promotes access to “essential medicines and vaccines for all” as part of a push for “universal health coverage” (UHC). Reflecting the globally focused zeitgeist, proponents of these intertwined initiatives are fond of celebrating “more joined-up thinking,” “merging of approaches,” “mutually reinforcing agendas” and “synergy between health system strengthening and health security efforts.”

No accident

At the end of 2014, the EU made a point of declaring vaccination an important public health tool, which the European public health community interpreted as “a crucial step to strengthen EU action supporting Member States…to implement effective immunization policies and programs.” With this groundwork laid, Italy—a G7 member—volunteered to spearhead the GHSA’s Immunization Action Package and also became one of the first countries to ramp up its own vaccine mandates. With massive investments by GlaxoSmithKline in Italy, where better to start than on the home front? Although a change in government initially delayed implementation of the 2017 compulsory vaccination decree, in early 2019, citing a “surge in measles cases,” the government told Italian parents not to bother sending their youngest (under age 6) children to school if unvaccinated, and promised to impose fines of five hundred euros for older unvaccinated children attending school. Likewise, in France, “non-vaccinated children cannot be admitted to any kind of collective institutions such as nurseries, kindergarten, schools or any social activity if they have not complied with the vaccine mandates.”

With the “fortuitous” measles headwinds at their back, there is little doubt that decision-makers view mandated vaccination for school attendance as a winning strategy and that use of this strategy is growing. The WHO has done its part to help the global effort by placing measles front and center in declaring “vaccine hesitancy”—the “reluctance or refusal to vaccinate”—one of the world’s top ten health threats for 2019. Clearly, it is “game on” for those seeking to override national idiosyncracies with a one-size-fits-all global vaccination agenda.

Legislators who are contemplating new mandates but are still willing to exercise a modicum of independent judgment should recognize that we are in a situation with “echoes of WMD”—“there is no international emergency” and “policy is being hi-jacked.” Here are a handful of critical questions that legislators also should consider:

  • First, measles symptoms can arise from either wild-type measles or vaccine strains—and the laboratory testing that is necessary to tell the difference between the two is rarely done. How can experts make consequential policies without more complete information about the proportion of measles cases caused by the vaccine?
  • A related point is that sizeable proportions of individuals affected by “outbreaks,” whether of measles or pertussis, are fully vaccinated. One study (albeit critical of those who do not vaccinate) showed that 55% to 76% of the individuals involved in five large pertussis incidents were fully vaccinated, as were 41% of measles cases reviewed. Study after study documents waning immunity “despite high vaccine coverage.” How can pronouncements about vaccine effectiveness ignore these critical facts?
  • Third, vaccine mandates have spillover effects on the social fabric. What are the ramifications of turning school and day care center administrators into “enforcement agents” who must “pass information about non-compliance to authorities”? What does it mean for a child’s right to an education when mandates exclude unvaccinated children from school “for the duration of their education”?
  • Finally, what about the health care providers who find themselves caught between the proverbial “rock and a hard place”? A study of Michigan nurses who provide vaccine education to parents requesting nonmedical exemptions found that many nurses had far more “complex and nuanced…evaluations of parents’ judgments and feelings about vaccines” than vaccine mandates would allow, in addition to “consistent commitments to respect parents, affirm their values, and protect their rights.” Vaccine mandates shut down the potential for respectful health care interactions.

Pro-vaccine critics of France’s decision to impose harsher vaccine mandates noted at the time that mandates actually fuel further “vaccine hesitancy.” Moreover, by offering significant benefits to “compliers” that are denied to “non-compliers,” policy-makers contribute to a divide-and-conquer environment that pits one group against another. As international researchers recently wrote, “[P]olitical and ethical considerations matter…. Vaccine mandates are not only a population health instrument, but a political one.” The GHSA’s disrespect for individual and national sovereignty promises to worsen these problems while doing little to improve children’s health.

Read full story here…


“© 9/17/19 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.




Ireland Starts Gender Neutral HPV Vaccine For Boys

Judicial Watch exposed the scandal of Merck’s Gardasil vaccine for girls and young women in 2014 as being “linked to thousands of debilitating side effects, according to the government’s own daunting statistics”. Ireland apparently didn’t get the message.

According the Judicial Watch report,

“Since 2007 Judicial Watch has been investigating the Gardasil scandal and exposed droves of government records documenting thousands of adverse reactions associated with the vaccine, including paralysis, convulsions, blindness and dozens of deaths. Based on the records JW published a special report in 2008 detailing Gardasil’s approval process, side effects, safety concerns and marketing practices. Undoubtedly, it illustrates a large-scale public health experiment.”

Whereas Gardasil was originally only offered to young girls, it is now conceived as a ‘gender neutral’ vaccine, thus doubling its potential market. ⁃ TN Editor [/su_note]

The HPV vaccine will be made available to first-year boys in secondary schools in Ireland for the first time from next week.

Until now, boys have not been included in the free human papillomavirus school vaccination programme.

Following a review by the Health Information and Quality Authority, the vaccine is being extended to all first-year secondary school students from the start of September.

Since 2010, girls in the first year of secondary school have been offered a form of the cancer protection, which has now been made more effective to protect against 9 out of 10 types of HPV cancers.

There is a catch up scheme for older girls, but the parents of boys who are above first year in secondary school will have to pay for the vaccine at their GP.

Minister for Health Simon Harris said the decision to provide it for first-year boys only is based on the medical advice available to him.

He said: “All the medical evidence and indeed HIQA’s health technology assessment highlighted the importance of starting with boys in first year.”

Minister Harris added: “For other parents, if you’re child isn’t in first year, you can still go to your GP and get the vaccine that way as well, through paying for it.”

However, he said he “certainly does not rule out a catch-up programme at a later stage”.

HPV is a virus that can cause a range of cancers including cervical cancer in women and penile and anal cancer in men, as well as head and neck cancers.

Around 400 cases associated with HPV are diagnosed here every year, while around 100 people die as a result.

Health Service Executive school vaccination teams will begin visiting secondary schools next week to offer the first of two doses of the HPV vaccine to first year students.

60,000 information booklets and consent forms are being issued to parents in advance.

The uptake rates among girls had fallen to around 50% in 2017, but have increased to around 70% since then following an information campaign, helped by HPV vaccine campaigner Laura Brennan who died in March from cervical cancer at the age of 26.

Speaking at the vaccination launch today, her brother Kevin Brennan said, “Laura poured herself into this campaign, knowing every time she told her story, it had the potential to save a life”.

He said: “The increase in the uptake rates of the HPV vaccine in last year’s first-year girls is bittersweet for us – we’re delighted that Laura has played a part in helping to protect so many more young people from HPV cancers.”

The Director of the HSE National Immunisation Office, Dr Lucy Jessop, said she is “100% confident in the vaccine” which she said provides really good overall protection.

She described the vaccine as “essential to help protect your children against HPV cancers in the future”.

Dr Jessop has encouraged parents to “read the information from the HSE and speak to a trusted health professional, if they have any questions, before signing the consent form for their child”.

Ireland now becomes just one of 20 countries around the world that have introduced a gender neutral HPV school vaccination scheme.

The former President of the National Association of General Practitioners has said the cost of a HPV vaccine for teenage boys who are not eligible for a free HSE vaccination will be “exceptionally expensive”.

Dr Maitiu Ó Tuathail, a Dublin-based doctor, said the roll out of the vaccination to boys in the first year of secondary school “is a very welcome development”.

Read full story here…